News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Reverse Engineer’s Perspective on the Boeing 787 ‘51 days... by hef19898 on Tuesday October 18, 2022 @06:57AM (#33245451)
But a 787 works fine with those reboots being part of scheduled maintenance. So the issue is what exactly again?
Re:Reverse Engineer’s Perspective on the Boeing 787 ‘51 days... by p_l on Tuesday October 18, 2022 @07:11AM (#33245565)
Essentially changes in typical operation procedures at airlines broke previous assumptions about regular full aircraft power downs, which triggered both the 248 day bug and the current 51 day bug.

It used to be that an aircraft would get a full power down as often as daily, but as individual components got more reliable and external power easily available, it became common for aircraft to not be shut down fully between flight days.

Re:Reverse Engineer’s Perspective on the Boeing 787 ‘51 days... by ggm on Tuesday October 18, 2022 @07:11AM (#33245563)
Nothing. I respond to a question posing why it might be a problem. It didn't say "in a 787" it was "in general" I suggest a class of problem which it might surface in. The wider question.

All aircraft have schedules of maintenance. Requirements to reboot a computer periodically isn't onerous. It's not onerous but the insane costs of recertification are. Fixing this problem to not require reboot would be very expensive. Not just the FAA process burdens but the wider costs. 787 battery problems probably wrecked the entire profit of the model for years.

The Max flight safety issue on another Boeing aircraft may mean its never profitable. The industry is wierd.